Bill Pirkle wrote:

>What does the list think of MIDI technology? Two of the 127 MIDI voices are
>choir oohs and choir aahs.  This means that who could hear a Bach two part
>invention without injury to the choir.  But beyond that, most classical
>music is now available in MIDI format at websites on the Internet.  This
>means one can get a classical music collection for free.  It is at least
>worth hearing if for no other reason than to see what is wrong with it.
>We learn from the bad as well as from the good.

I think in general, that it's better than nothing, but much worse than the
real thing.  I haven't been able to get any clear idea of texture when I
hear the midi arrangements of pieces.

>The question is, for example, how well does a Beethoven sonata sound in
>MIDI format to music experts?

Feh.  It's fun for the person DOING it, but not for the listener.  I
wouldn't (for example) BUY a midi performance of anything, or go across
the street to hear one, unless that were the only way I could hear that
particular composition ...  and even then I'd have my reservations.  I
would not be able to tolerate hearing Beethoven.

>I have heard the Beethoven violin concerto in MIDI and is sounds OK.
>(MIDI allows putting many nuances into to music for fidelity).

UGH.  I am prejudiced, of course.  I used to be a fiddle player.

>Any comments.

See above.  Fun for the programmer, perhaps.  Hell on wheels for the music
lover.  NUANCES? You gotta be kidding.

Mimi Ezust, arch musical conservative.